Gruber v. Gruber: Understanding Pennsylvania’s Relocation Law

When divorced parents share custody of their children, there are very few issues that cause as much tension as one parent’s desire to relocate with their minor child. Whether the move is for a new job or a new relationship, relocation cases force the courts to balance the parents’ freedom to move against the child’s need for stability and contact with both of their parents. In 2011, Pennsylvania codified relocation standards. Prior to this, the matter was decided by case law. The case was known as Gruber v. Gruber. It became the cornerstone of relocation law in Pennsylvania.

Background of the case 

In the Gruber case, the mother, who had primary physical custody of the couple’s minor child, sought permission to move with her child from Pennsylvania to Arizona. The father, in this case, opposed the move. He argued it would interfere with his visitation rights. At the time, there was very little statutory guidance on relocation cases. The Pennsylvania Superior Court thus took the opportunity to establish a clear analytical framework for judges who were faced with relocation disputes.

The Gruber test 

In the Gruber case, the Superior Court’s opinion set out a three-part test that guided Pennsylvania’s relocation law for more than two decades.

• Potential advantages of the move – The court has to consider whether the proposed relocation will provide any tangible advantages to the custodial parent and, by extension, the child. Improved employment, better education, or stronger family support all weigh in favor of relocation.
• Integrity of the motives – In all cases, the relocating parent must demonstrate good faith. They must prove that their motive is not intended to frustrate the other parent’s relationship with the child. In addition, the opposing parent’s objections will also be scrutinized to ensure they come from a genuine concern for the child’s welfare instead of their desire to control or punish the relocating parent.
• Feasibility of preserving the relationship – Ultimately, the court will evaluate whether the non-relocating parent can maintain a meaningful relationship with their child. This usually involves assessing the availability of alternative visitation schedules or communication methods.

This three-part framework, known as the Gruber Test, recognized that relocation cases tend to defy simple answers. Instead of a simple “yes” or “no”, Gruber emphasized a balancing approach that weighed the potential benefits against the potential harm to the child.

Legacy of Gruber

The 2011 Custody Act rendered Gruber obsolete. Today, the 2011 Custody Act (23 Pa.C.S. § 5337) provides a list of ten statutory factors that courts can use to determine whether the relocation is in the best interests of the child. These include elements of Gruber.

Even today, Pennsylvania courts routinely reference Gruber as the origin of relocation jurisprudence.

Talk to a Philadelphia, PA, Custody Relocations Attorney Today 

The Law Offices of Lauren H. Kane represent the interests of Philadelphia residents during their divorce. Call our Philadelphia family lawyers today to schedule an appointment, and we can begin discussing your next steps right away.

Source:

law.justia.com/cases/pennsylvania/supreme-court/1990/400-pa-super-174-1.html